Prolonged progressive hypermetabolism during COVID-19 hospitalization undetected by common predictive energy equations. Niederer Laura E,Miller Hilary,Haines Krista L,Molinger Jeroen,Whittle John,MacLeod David B,McClave Stephen A,Wischmeyer Paul E Clinical nutrition ESPEN BACKGROUND & AIMS:Indirect calorimetry (IC) is the gold-standard for determining measured resting energy expenditure (mREE) in critical illness. When IC is not available, predicted resting energy expenditure (pREE) equations are commonly utilized, which often inaccurately predict metabolic demands leading to over- or under-feeding. This study aims to longitudinally assess mREE via IC in critically ill patients with SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) infection throughout the entirety of, often prolonged, intensive care unit (ICU) stays and compare mREE to commonly utilized pREE equations. METHODS:This single-center prospective cohort study of 38 mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients from April 1, 2020 to February 1, 2021. The Q-NRG® Metabolic Monitor was used to obtain IC data. The Harris-Benedict (HB), Mifflin St-Jeor (MSJ), Penn State University (PSU), and weight-based equations from the American Society of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition - Society of Critical Care Medicine (ASPEN-SCCM) Clinical Guidelines were utilized to assess the accuracy of common pREE equations and their ability to predict hypo/hypermetabolism in COVID-19 ICU patients. RESULTS:The IC measures collected revealed a relatively normometabolic or minimally hypermetabolic mREE at 21.3 kcal/kg/d or 110% of predicted by the HB equation over the first week of mechanical ventilation (MV). This progressed to significant and uniquely prolonged hypermetabolism over successive weeks to 28.1 kcal/kg/d or 143% of HB predicted by MV week 3, with hypermetabolism persisting to MV week 7. Obese individuals displayed a more truncated response with significantly lower mREE versus non-obese patients in MV week 1 (19.5 ± 1.0 kcal/kg/d vs 25.1 ± 1.8 kcal/kg/d, respectively; p < 0.01), with little change in weeks 2-3 (19.5 ± 1.5 kcal/kg/d vs 28.0 ± 2.0 kcal/kg/d; p < 0.01). Both ASPEN-SCCM upper range and PSU pREE equations provided close approximations of mREE yet, like all pREE equations, occasionally over- and under-predicted energy needs and typically did not predict late hypermetabolism. CONCLUSIONS:Study results show a truly unique metabolic response in COVID-19 ICU patients, characterized by significant and prolonged, progressive hypermetabolism peaking at 3 weeks' post-intubation, persisting for up to 7 weeks in ICU. This pattern was more clearly demonstrated in non-obese versus obese patients. This response is unique and distinct from any previously described model of ICU stress response in its prolonged hypermetabolic nature. This data reaffirms the need for routine, longitudinal IC measures to provide accurate energy targets in COVID-19 ICU patients. The PSU and ASPEN-SCCM equations appear to yield the most reasonable estimation to IC-derived mREE in COVID-19 ICU patients, yet still often over-/under-predict energy needs. These findings provide a practical guide for caloric prescription in COVID-19 ICU patients in the absence of IC. 10.1016/j.clnesp.2021.07.021

Gastric Versus Small Bowel Feeding in Critically Ill Adults. Schlein Kirsten Nutrition in clinical practice : official publication of the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition Critically ill patients often require enteral feedings as a primary supply of nutrition. Whether enteral nutrition (EN) should be delivered as a gastric versus small bowel feeding in the critically ill patient population remains a contentious topic. The Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM)/American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (ASPEN), the European Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (ESPEN), and the Canadian Clinical Practice Guidelines (CCPG) are not in consensus on this topic. No research to date demonstrates a significant difference between the two feeding routes in terms of patient mortality, ventilator days, or length of stay in the intensive care unit (ICU); however, studies provide some evidence that there may be other benefits to using a small bowel feeding route in critically ill patients. The purpose of this paper is to examine both sides of this debate and review advantages and disadvantages of both small bowel and gastric routes of EN. Practical issues and challenges to small bowel feeding tube placement are also addressed. Finally, recommendations are provided to help guide the clinician when selecting a feeding route, and suggestions are made for future research. 10.1177/0884533616629633

Guidelines for the provision of nutrition support therapy in the adult critically ill patient: The American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition. JPEN. Journal of parenteral and enteral nutrition BACKGROUND:This guideline updates recommendations from the 2016 American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (ASPEN)/Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM) critical care nutrition guideline for five foundational questions central to critical care nutrition support. METHODS:The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) process was used to develop and summarize evidence for clinical practice recommendations. Clinical outcomes were assessed for (1) higher vs lower energy dose, (2) higher vs lower protein dose, (3) exclusive isocaloric parenteral nutrition (PN) vs enteral nutrition (EN), (4) supplemental PN (SPN) plus EN vs EN alone, (5A) mixed-oil lipid injectable emulsions (ILEs) vs soybean oil, and (5B) fish oil (FO)-containing ILE vs non-FO ILE. To assess safety, weight-based energy intake and protein were plotted against hospital mortality. RESULTS:Between January 1, 2001, and July 15, 2020, 2320 citations were identified and data were abstracted from 36 trials including 20,578 participants. Patients receiving FO had decreased pneumonia rates of uncertain clinical significance. Otherwise, there were no differences for any outcome in any question. Owing to a lack of certainty regarding harm, the energy prescription recommendation was decreased to 12-25 kcal/kg/day. CONCLUSION:No differences in clinical outcomes were identified among numerous nutrition interventions, including higher energy or protein intake, isocaloric PN or EN, SPN, or different ILEs. As more consistent critical care nutrition support data become available, more precise recommendations will be possible. In the meantime, clinical judgment and close monitoring are needed. This paper was approved by the ASPEN Board of Directors. 10.1002/jpen.2267

Effect of early nutrition support on length of stay, mortality, and extubation in patients with COVID-19. Nutrition in clinical practice : official publication of the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition BACKGROUND:Many hospitals have been using nutrition support guidelines for patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) as outlined in the April 2020 article released by the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (ASPEN) and the Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM). Currently, there are insufficient data on the outcomes of following these guidelines. METHODS:This was a retrospective, observational study of 131 adult inpatients with COVID-19 admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU) at Banner Health to observe differences in length of stay, mortality, and number of days intubated based on the timing of nutrition support start relative to hours intubated and hours in the ICU. RESULTS:There were no statistically significant differences between length of stay, mortality, or number of days intubated between patients who started nutrition support within <12 h of intubation, >12 h of intubation and <36 h in the ICU, or >36 h of intubation and those who were not intubated. Patients who started nutrition support after >36 h in the ICU had the longest lengths of stay (median [25th, 75th percentile]  = 25.5 [19.25, 35.25] days; P > 0.05) and number of days intubated (16.5 [10.0, 24.75] days; P > 0.050); however, it was not statistically significant. There was a significant difference between the three intubated groups and the nonintubated group on Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores (P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS:Prospective, multicenter trials are needed; however, following the SCCM/ASPEN guidelines for nutrition support in patients with COVID-19 may be found to decrease length of stay and number of days intubated. 10.1002/ncp.10868